Last Friday, somewhat to my surprise and slightly against my initial inclinations, I found myself at the detention center in Camp Crame, visiting the detainees from the Manila Peninsula incident of the previous day. I had come to act as counsel in the inquest proceedings set for that evening, representing Dodong Nemenzo, the former UP President, and a man I personally held in the highest esteem, both for his ideas and his ideals.
While waiting for the inquest to start (it was scheduled for 8 PM, but consistent with typical “Filipino-time,” actually began almost two hours later) I stayed inside the detention center and talked with some of the other detainees. Far from being the dour and serious affairs most people would probably expect (after all, we were in a detention area in the middle of a military camp, surrounded by several thousand armed police officers, and the people I was with stood accused, rightly or wrongly, of attempting to overthrow the government), the conversation was, for the most part, light and even humorous. A perfect complement, I suppose, to the surreal fact that from the Crame detention center, you could clearly see the lights from the bars and restaurants in nearby Greenhills. This probably stands as proof positive that we Filipinos are a cheerful, or at the very least, a resilient people — we can find it in ourselves to laugh and trade bad puns while undergoing detention for rebellion.
Of course, not all the conversations I had that Friday evening involved joking around. One which stands out in particular is the talk I had with the sometimes admired, oftentimes reviled icon of anti-administration sentiment, Senator Antonio Trillanes IV.
I must confess at the outset that when I came to Crame that Friday, I did not really count myself as a Trillanes fan. I mean, yeah, I was thrilled that more than 11 million Filipinos voted him into the Senate last May (if the COMELEC hadn’t “misplaced” my voter record, I would probably have even cast my lot with them). But this was really more because I saw him as a symbol of resistance, rather than actually agreeing with the actions he had chosen to undertake. Taking over a luxury residence in Makati, and then surrendering after 23 hours is not exactly my notion of effective political action. And the events of the previous day had not exactly done much to lessen my cynicism. If anything, Manila Pen in 2007 seemed a smaller-scale, less successful (if there is such a thing) version of Oakwood in 2003.
That said, however, despite a full supply of cynicism and lawyerly skepticism, I came away from Crame last Friday, counting myself as a Trillanes fan.
I do not mean that I agree with what he did (however various observers may choose to construe it). But I’d like to think that I at least came to understand in part why he did it. And it is for those reasons that I have come to admire the man.
What struck me most was Trillanes’ overwhelming, overpowering sincerity. The man is a believer. Not simply in the righteousness of his own cause, after all, even Jovito Palparan is probably completely convinced of his own virtue, but more significantly, in the capacity of Filipinos to recognize what is right and act accordingly. Responding to a point raised about the difficulty in getting people to mass up at a distant, inaccessible Makati hotel on a rainy Thursday, Trillanes quite simply stated that he believed that “people should be willing to walk a mile in the rain for their country.” Up to now, I am awed by such faith in us Filipinos.
While many of us may criticize the impracticality, or even the outright naivety, of this view, we have to acknowledge its compelling character. For two and a half years, efforts to stand up to the GMA regime — a regime that has consistently proven itself to be ruthless, corrupt, and utterly bereft of moral or legal scruples — have been bedeviled by questions of practicality and expediency. Who, or what, do we replace her with? How do we go about it? Who do we accept as allies? Without necessarily dismissing the legitimacy of these concerns, I think the time has come to ask ourselves if in focusing on the logistics of the struggle, we have wavered in our conviction to wage it in the first place.
And maybe that is why, last Friday, I became a Trillanes fan. For despite all our condescension towards his “political naivety,” and all our snide remarks regarding the “inept” way he carried out the Manila Peninsula affair, he remains a man who dared to act on the outrage that still roars so fiercely in our hearts.
December 11, 2007 at 8:42 am |
dear barry,
reading what you wrote provided a relief from the onslaught of blogs that hurled vicious criticisms on what happened nov. 29. for all that event’s shortcomings, i for one see the sheer bravery of even attempting such given the odds. i secretly blame myself for not just dropping everything to go to the Makati and for letting “stuffs/ things/what not” get in the way of standing up and being counted.
rachael
December 15, 2007 at 3:08 pm |
tama. nag-aagree ako.
at mabuti naman nagboblog ka na ulit.
haha. ang talino ng comment ko sobra.
December 19, 2007 at 10:22 am |
Two intertexts for your last sentence there. “Once more unto the breach,” indeed.
“Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more,
Or close the wall up with our English dead!
In peace there’s nothing so becomes a man
As modest stillness and humility;
But when the blast of war blows in our ears,
Then imitate the action of the tiger:
Stiffen the sinews, summon up the blood.” – Henry V, 3.1 38-44.
And a much older reminder, still, from the great Marcus Aurelius:
“Blush not to be helped, for you are bound to carry out the task laid before you, as a soldier to storm the breach. What then, if for very lameness, you cannot mount the ramparts unaided, but can do this with another’s help?”